Capitalism has walls to keep people out.
This is bad.
Socialism has walls to keep people in.
This is better?
This is bad.
Socialism has walls to keep people in.
This is better?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Unbridled Capitalism is self-destructive
- Thread starter Estro Felino
- Start date
IOW, conforming to the wishes of the state?
So you prefer the state to decide your lifestyle for you?
No...because the State will never okay violence.
If the State becomes authoritarian and bad, the citizens will rise, will make revolutions.
In France there have been five republics because since 1789 there have been five revolutions.
I didn't say the State controls my way of thinking.
But yes, the State will need to control economy, and so limit freedom of economic choice.
Much, much better.
Audie
Veteran Member
It's a very flawed mentality
Okay.
For the most part, yes.
The other problem is how "we" the people can realistically limit the power of government when they're the ones in control of all the switches and levers.
A good way of evaluating the function and effectiveness of government is to look at the results and who benefits.
The way I see it, government has one of three choices: They can work for the benefit of the common people, or they can work for the benefit of the wealthy capitalists, or they can work for the benefit of themselves.
Socialism has walls to keep people in? If so, they obviously didn't work very well. Capitalist walls don't work very well either, and in fact, building walls works against their interests since they depend on undocumented workers to keep their businesses afloat.
IOW, 5 times the state has gone bad. 5 reasons to limit the power of the state.
Yet perhaps this time it will be different right?
I think in the US we've somehow managed to give the state too much power.
They always work for the benefit of themselves. It's human nature.
Now there are some people who see the benefit to themselves in helping others.
Unfortunately more rare than it should be. However, that is true regardless of the political/financial systems in place.
Didn't say the state controls your thinking but yes, that is what they attempt to do. By propaganda, the media and public education.
The state will control the economy for it's own benefit, not necessarily yours.
Though I think I get it. You assume that by allowing the state to control your finances you will achieve more freedom. I assume that by controlling my own finances, I will achieve greater freedom. Like being able to decide where my children go to school. By deciding to limit the propaganda and political thinking my children are exposed to.
If you are taught that greater freedom will happen under the control of the government, that is what you will believe.
Audie
Veteran Member
If you are at peace uttering falsehoods and running,
go for it.
I subscribe to none of that " social darwinist" stuff.
If you have a worthy thought to express it should not
require you to make things up in order to find fault in
others.
Audie
Veteran Member
If I hire someone does it not benefit them?
Zero sum game is seldom it.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
Well, with the U.S. now averaging roughly 40,000 homicides per year, "Every man for himself!" certainly isn't helping lower that one iota.
I would agree that they would try to work for the benefit of themselves, but we also have to consider what that actually looks like in practice. Because civil service and military salaries seem rather modest in comparison to their private sector counterparts. Of course, they are restrained by laws, where they can't take bribes, feather their own nests, dip into the public treasury or misappropriate funds. That would be against the law, and there are penalties for that. But those who tend to work for their own benefit might think they can get away with it.
Sometimes, it can come through in pork-barrel legislation, where the corruption can be hidden more easily, with the politicians giving some tacit justification that "at least I'm getting some goodies for my own district." That's a good way to keep the good old boys back home happy.
We may have said things to each other which may have been equally bad, but that was yesterday. Let's move on.
As for what you personally subscribe to or don't subscribe to, I will defer any further comment on that matter. (I should also point out that I never served in any "Red Guard" and I've never killed anyone, so maybe you can defer that kind of talk as well.)
However, that doesn't change the basic objective statement that capitalism and social Darwinism do share a great deal of ideological overlap. That's not a lie. You might disagree with it, just as we might disagree over many other topics.
I would grant that there are many capitalists who might believe they are more liberal and benign in their capitalist beliefs, so they're not necessarily consciously social Darwinists. I'm not saying that any of them are bad people at all, and in fact, many of them are probably quite good, honest, ethical, and even generous individuals. (Just like there are some good lawyers and police officers out there.)
But I submit that they're missing the forest through the trees. They may be well-intentioned, but they're unable to see the long-term ramifications and consequences of the ideals they support. I look back at history and see that we've been down this road before. I'm not blind to the historical excesses of socialism, but that too is also in the past - and we can learn from the mistakes of the past.
My view is that a peaceful, cooperative, and harmonious society is far more stable than one rooted in conflict, hostility, and predation. The latter may be considered the more "natural" course, and indeed, that's how humans have operated for most of recorded history. Humans are really horrible creatures overall, but history has also shown that we can change. We can grow up. We can learn to share, be fair, socially just, and respectful of human rights. But if we can't do that - or if too many people stubbornly refuse to do so - then that will carry its own consequences.
Heyo
Veteran Member
I guess it's your time to think again. The article says exactly what I have said: monopolies are not illegal.
Are There Any Legal Monopolies in America or Europe
Legal monopolies continue to exist in the United States and Europe despite the current trend against their recognition and endorsement.www.investopedia.com
Audie
Veteran Member
Try setting up the kind that is and see
how the results suit you